Talk:Starfleet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Star Trek (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Shouldn't a flagship be commanded by an admiral?

According to the Star Trek universe, only during times of major battles. But when they refer to the Enterprise as a flagship, they really mean "Best Ship (technological-wise) in the Fleet".

FYI, the term 'flagship' is the one on which the admiral flies his flag; i.e. the one he is on. A large fleet might have several flagships if it has several officers commanding more than one ship. DJ Clayworth 04:34, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To piggy-back off of UTC's comment, technically the admiral doesn't command the flagship, per se. He commands a fleet of vessels, including the flagship, from the flagship. The flagship itself, like all other vessels in the fleet, would have its own captain.


Also regarding the Enterprise, I don't think that it is ever mentioned that it is flagship of the First Fleet in the Dominion War. Do you have a source for this?

Enterprise Starfleet[edit]


What do we do with Enterprise era Starfleet? I propose calling it Earth Starfleet and the Starfleet from the future would be Federation Starfleet. Also, can someone put up the Starfleet logo up? Thanks.

--Blue387 21:15, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like a good new article. I will work on the Federtion logo. Might ahve some copyright issues User:Husnock 7/10/2004

I'm quoting from my old copy of Stephen E Whitfield's "The Making of Star Trek": "The category of 'Enlisted man' does not exist. STAR TREK goes on the assumption that every man and woman aboard the USS Enterprise is the equivalent of a qualified astronaut, therefore an officer". DJ Clayworth 04:34, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You hit on the head when you said old. The concept made sense in the Original Series, but went away when they established the character of Yeoman Rand, which is an enlisted title. In the later series, the character of Miles O'Brien clearly established Starfleet had enlisted ranks. He was flat out refered to as a "Chief" and in the last seasons of Deep Space Nine made several mentions to himself as being an enlisted man User:Husnock 18 Jul 04
Chief O'Brien was washed out of the academy after a year and then joined the enlisted ranks of Star Fleet. This he once mention in a conversation to Cap. Picard. He also mentioned in that conversation that he was to young and wanted the Fleet life rather sooner than later. Golf 00:44, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The actual back story of Chief O'Brien was that he trained to be a concert violinst, but left home to enlist in Starfleet much to the dismay of his father. This was established in several episodes of Deep Space Nine. Dont recall ever seeing any reference to him being an Academy dropout. Do you remember the episode? -User:Husnock 30 Aug 2004

Commodore[edit]

Husnock redid the adition that I made abbout the commador, yet I only know of one book that has a commador in it. So is used many times in fanon isn't true... Golf 13:33, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pocket Books by Simon and Schuster has the rank of Commodore in several different novels. It is also appears numerous times in DC comics. You might only know of one book, but that doesnt mean others dont exist. User:Husnock 29 Aug 2004

Starfleet Command[edit]

The Star Trek Encyclopedia describes "Starfleet Command" as the:

operating authority for the interstellar scientific, exploratory, and defensive agency of the United Federation of Planets

That is to say, I believe that "Starfleet Command" is the canonical name of the organization, rather than just "Starfleet". The article at Starfleet Command suggests that it is only the command group of the organization, but I don't think that is what the show intended. func(talk) 03:36, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Starfleet Command is the command and control authority of Starfleet. Other branches of Starfleet include Starfleet Medical, Starfleet Engineering, Starfleet Tactical, and Starfleet Sciences. The organization, as a whole, is referred to as "Starfleet". I can see the point, though, but if you study what it said in the shows, movies, and expanded literature, the entire group has always been called simply "Starfleet". Husnock 17 Sep 04

As a convenience, yes, in the same way that we refer to the Navy, rather than to the United States Navy. (Um... didn't mean to be non-inclusive of non-U.S. citizens, there.) The characters also often refer to the Federation, as in "this is the Federation starship Enterprise", but its formal name is the United Federation of Planets. In truth, I don't consider it all that big a deal, but Michael Okuda and other official continuity people at Star Trek are pretty clear on the matter. func(talk) 05:34, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What the...?! Do you mean to tell me that Wikipedia has no article on Michael Okuda?!?!?! Darn... and I was hoping to get some sleep tonight. func(talk) 05:36, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to disagree (wish other people would get involoved with this one). The Trek Encyclopedia you mention actually has separate entries for Starfleet (page 468 of the revised encyclopedia) and for Starfleet Command (page 467). Starfleet is listed as "deep space exploratory, scientific, diplomatic and defensive agency of the United Federation of Planets". Starfleet Command is listed as "operating authority for the interstellar agency" etc. It is pretty clear that Starfleet Command are the bosses of Starfleet. Also, in the live action shows the characters often speak about "reporting to Starfleet Command" or "contact Starfleet Command" or "we've recieved orders from Starfleet Command". Never once has Picard or Kirk ever made a statement such as "This is the Enterprise of Starfleet Command". Its always simply Starfleet. To summarize, I would not make the changes you are discussing. They would almost certianly be reverted Husnock 17 Sep 2004

Oh, heck!!! ;-) I'm a victim of poor sorting of the Encyclopedia! I looked up Starfleet, and found Startfleet Command, which, as you point out, occurs on an earlier page. I can also see that I mis-read the sentence that I posted above: "and defensive agency". You know, in my world, an entry on Startfleet should be located before Starfleet Command, like it would if they were files in a computer window.

Ah, Ha!!!! And I see the problem... there is a period (full stop) after the entry for Starfleet. Their database automatically would have sorted "Starfleet." after everything that was "Starfleet ...".

P.S. With regards to They would almost certianly be reverted, you're being overly defensive. I started a conversation on the talk page. I didn't make any changes, and wouldn't have without consensus.

func(talk) 13:07, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Nooooo problem. Didnt mean to imply, either, that you would be summarily reverted. I've just observed a large number of people are watching this page and make changes immediately if someone adds or delete something that is disputed. Its not uncommon to put something in and have it gone five minutes later because people disagreed. Not that I would have done that. Anyway... Husnock 17 Sep 04

Incidentally, I thought that all Husnock were wiped out, everywhere. ;-) func(talk) 16:04, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Heinlein's Space Cadet as a model for Starfleet?[edit]

An anon added a statement to the article on Robert A. Heinlein's novel Space Cadet saying that "it has been suggested that the Patrol served as a model for the Star Trek universe's Starfleet." I'm not sure that this is verifiable, or even true, so I've deleted it for now. Does anyone here have any solid information that would support this statement? Thanks! --Bcrowell 16:00, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Starfleet skin for wikipedia?[edit]

Does anyone know who to ask about making a Starfleet database-looking skin for Wikipedia.org? Or is it just a silly idea :) --mskogly 13:17, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

If You want a Database-looking skin, go to the star trek wiki at http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Portal:Main Captain Eric 19:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

More Common RPG[edit]

On the page about Starfleet, there is talk of the alt.startrek.rpg There are other major Star Trek RPs available. They were based from the old WBS and was a real time chat RP system. They are currently used in the new WBS, Warp1, and other chat areas. How would we go about adding this?

ref tags/citing (as relates to JAG article; written as it was merged here)[edit]

I undid my own introduction of the ref tags to JAG because it -- and other Trek-related stuff -- seem to take flak for citing the episodes for information, since they are primary sources. It may be more appropriate, or at least remove a vector for criticism, to go ahead and mention the episodes in the article body and to cite the reliable secondary source (i.e. encyclopedia) as the "reference" (enc. repeats all that info).

Additionally, and I think more emphatically, is that establishing the [article subject]-[plot/series significance] connection is more concretely done by mentioning the episodes in the article text. For example (and I don't remember if it was actually like this before Cool Cat's edits), stating, "The episode 'Measure of Man' centers on a JAG proceeding that establishes Data's free status" more clearly meets the burden of proof for notability and relevance than "JAG Captain Phillippa Louvois presides over a hearing that rules that Lieutenant Commander Data is not Starfleet property"[2] -- based on the latter, there's nothing to clarify whether this statement is based off of a background conversation or was an integral part of the plot.

In the end, perhaps the best thing to cover all the bases would be to mention the episodes specifically in the article and also, for good measure, to duplicate their listing in the references section. --EEMeltonIV 01:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Starfleet Tactical[edit]

Material below is coppied from Talk:Starfleet Tactical --Cat out 02:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Some of this is non-canon. I'd delete those parts but there wouldn't be much of an article left. pomegranate 19:00, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

Considering the size of this article, this probably should be merged into the main Starfleet article, leaving a redirect behind - it could always be recreated here if some more detailed information about it turns up. Quack 688 01:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

No its too large to fit Starfleet, IMHO. --Cat out 01:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Starfleet/Paramilitary?[edit]

How can Starfleet be considered as a paramilitary organisation? Starfleet is, as it were, the Federation's Military Arm, is it not? That would make it anything but paramilitary. Jonomacdrones 17:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Star Trek has always emphasized that Starfleet's primary mission is space exploration. The military/paramilitary distinction is made clear in Star Trek: Enterprise with the introduction of the MACOs (Military Assault Command) as a separate agency from Earth Starfleet. We assume this is a retcon meant to project the same explicit distinction into the future continuity. Wl219 13:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Picard says in "Peak Performance" (Season 2) "Starfleet is not a military organization. Its purpose is exploration."

///////////////// Response: Don't forget, Picard is umon. They lie.  ;) (Seriously,several episodes of TNG dealt with how when seen from the outside - by "alien races" for example - this concept could reasonably be called into question. There's enough depth to the entire "fictional universe" that's been created at this point, that it's "a legitimate criticism" of Starfleet.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.248.241 (talk) 12:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Section 31 and Temporal Investigations[edit]

Can anyone point to reliable source that suggests these are both actually parts of Starfleet? I ask because Section 31 seems to operate outside Starfleet's purview (although sometimes in cahoots with them), and I don't remember anything in T&T-ations to suggest (and certainly nothing emphatic) about it being a Starfleet agency (and the two fellows certainly aren't wearing Starfleet uniforms). Anyone have the Encyclopedia on hand with a possible answer? --EEMeltonIV 04:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

As far as 31 goes, I remember Sloan saying in Inquisition (DS9) that its creation was legally sanctioned by a "section 31" of some provision in the Starfleet Charter:
Sloan: Let's just say I belong to another branch of Starfleet Intelligence... our official designation is Section Thirty-one.
Bashir: Never heard of it.
And later:
Bashir: And Starfleet sanctions what you're doing?
Sloan: We don't submit reports or ask for approval for specific operations, if that's what you mean. We're an autonomous department.
Bashir: Authorized by whom?
Sloan: Section Thirty-one was part of the original Starfleet charter.
Bashir: That was two hundred years ago. Are you telling me you've been operating on your own ever since? Without specific orders? Accountable to nobody, but yourselves?
From the script Wl219 21:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Contradictions[edit]

The article states:

(note: this contradicts an earlier portion of the article, which cites the Presideo as the Academy's home)

Rather than note the inconsistency, it should be fixed. I'm tagging the article, anyone who can clear up the discrepancy please do so. --Chancemichaels 19:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)chancemichaels

Prime Directive[edit]

Okay, so there's this horrible line in the Prime Directive section: "For obvious continuity reasons, in Star Trek: Enterprise, the Prime Directive is conspicuously absent." What the heck does that mean? I've been watching Star Trek for 27 years and I have *no* idea what this is talking about. Alphachimera (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)